Career Women......

[Stockalone]

I would never tell a man exactly what it takes for him to be a "real man." Men, like women, are so varied in their temperaments, desires, that this would be impossible, and I lack the insight to be able to declare this for any man. Truly.

 

I am still working on the type of woman I wish to be.

 

Understood. I am very much enamored with the "nice guy." With me, they don't finish last, but I have found that my independence has been misconstrued where men *think* I see them as convenience. I am still working on how to reconcile this when dating, so men aren't turned away by feeling I'm somehow emasculating them. It's me making an honest attempt at not seeming too needy, but perhaps I make them feel like they're not needed at all. I'm working on this balance, but it's a difficult line to draw. What JB said is true about feminism being a disservice toward this situation.

 

 

I remember you posting about your casual LDR. You had been patient for a long time, if you were one of the overly eager career women, you wouldn't have done that.

 

Well, I am one of the guys who needs to be needed (at least a little bit). That is because I am also a bit needy and think a little bit of co-dependency in a relationship is good. My neediness can be pretty much controlled when I am in a relationship, but I struggle with it during the dating process.

 

Giving up some independence makes people vulnerable, but I don't know how I could love without such vulnerability. That is another reason why I want to needed, because if I am not needed at all, I become more replaceable.

 

How can I care and love if I have (nearly) nothing to lose?

 

 

Good point. The crux of my relationship that just ended hinged on this point. He said what he'd never found was a woman with a certain independence, and when he got it, I think he realized it's not what he wanted after all. He lost his job, and was struggling with his self-worth as a result. I assured him my interest was in *him* not what he could or couldn't provide me. It didn't matter. All of the women he dated before me needed him, and he felt like their caretaker. In his case, this is the dynamic he prefers and is now dating someone more along these lines.

 

When I said that I am not intimidated by the career woman, I could have added that they are just as intimidating as any other woman.

 

I kind of understand the self-doubts about dating while being without a job. It's one thing to make less money than the woman, but it is quite another not to be able to take care of the woman should that ever be required.

 

That is still ingrained in most men. While men you no longer need to be the sole bread winner, I am sure that it would depress me to know that I would not be able to provide anything because I lost my job.

 

Then again, I have my own test, and because I don't pass that test, I don't date. Your guy doesn't seem to be bothered by the loss of his job now that he is dating someone else, so I have no idea what his reasoning is. I am sorry that it didn't work out for you.

 

 

This is true. It can always go both ways. I would be conflicted about the man staying home, because I would be missing those tender early moments with the children. By me staying home, I would be a bit stir crazy not working in the fast-paced profession I've become accustomed to. Either way would be a compromise.

 

I also said in my post I would have no problems staying home with children during their formative years, to ensure proper development. I would prefer it, but I probably would go back to work at some point, because it is something I am compelled to do. I'm not sure I could completely trade in my career. I've worked too hard and have a lot to offer. The decision would require communication and compromise, and I hope that one day I'm lucky enough to have a spouse who could be my partner in this.

 

But for now, I'm just the career woman.

 

I understand that neither situation is perfect. Women want a job and they also need a job. After all, the bills need to be paid and that education should reap the rewards. And then, when women have established their career and are thinking about a family and kids, a wrench is thrown in the works and you have to choose between devoting 100% of your time to your kids or your job or something inbetween, desperately trying not to miss a beat at both jobs.

[Eve]

I also said in my post I would have no problems staying home with children during their formative years, to ensure proper development. I would prefer it, but I probably would go back to work at some point, because it is something I am compelled to do. I'm not sure I could completely trade in my career.

 

I can understand this. I have been working full-time now for the last eight years - basically once our eldest two children entered secondary schooling. We are now in phase 2 where within the next 5 years the roles will change and my Husband will stay at home and run a family type business and I will go to work because I can command a wage high enough to comfortably support him whilst he sets up the business.

 

I could not have worked full-time when the children were young because of childcare costs and the general running of a home. Some women have to do both because they are single parents and I really respect them. I do think it is important for a woman to be able to provide for herself and her children in case a marraige fails. If my Husband were to leave me tonight (which I know he wont) but if he were to leave, I would be perfectly fine financially. That is important to me. My Mothers generation never had that choice and put up wth a lot of abuse becasue they were entirely dependant on their Husbands.

[audrey_1]

I remember you posting about your casual LDR. You had been patient for a long time, if you were one of the overly eager career women, you wouldn't have done that.

 

Well, I am one of the guys who needs to be needed (at least a little bit). That is because I am also a bit needy and think a little bit of co-dependency in a relationship is good. My neediness can be pretty much controlled when I am in a relationship, but I struggle with it during the dating process.

 

Giving up some independence makes people vulnerable, but I don't know how I could love without such vulnerability. That is another reason why I want to needed, because if I am not needed at all, I become more replaceable.

 

How can I care and love if I have (nearly) nothing to lose?

 

I like these points. Yes, I am casual LDR girl. He texted me today and said he would call me after the presidential debates. I am very nervous. I recently came clean with him about the depth of my feelings for him, because I had been trying so hard to be strong and not be vulnerable, but I realized that this was working against me and killing his attraction to me, if it hasn't already, probably for all the reasons you stated above. I have been trying to strike this balance between career woman and vulnerability. It's where logic meets emotions. It's hard.

 

Last we spoke, he had been out with this girl twice. He told me about it. Another thread.

 

When I said that I am not intimidated by the career woman, I could have added that they are just as intimidating as any other woman.

 

I kind of understand the self-doubts about dating while being without a job. It's one thing to make less money than the woman, but it is quite another not to be able to take care of the woman should that ever be required.

 

That is still ingrained in most men. While men you no longer need to be the sole bread winner, I am sure that it would depress me to know that I would not be able to provide anything because I lost my job.

 

Then again, I have my own test, and because I don't pass that test, I don't date. Your guy doesn't seem to be bothered by the loss of his job now that he is dating someone else, so I have no idea what his reasoning is. I am sorry that it didn't work out for you.

 

I think he's just looking to pass the time while he's waiting to hear whether or not his government contract is approved (that I wrote). The executives will be visiting in March for due diligence concerning the project. I am in another state and not readily available, plus the next couple of months are very busy work months for me. Gee, my job negatively impacting a relationship, assuming he's even in to me. Full circle!

 

 

I understand that neither situation is perfect. Women want a job and they also need a job. After all, the bills need to be paid and that education should reap the rewards. And then, when women have established their career and are thinking about a family and kids, a wrench is thrown in the works and you have to choose between devoting 100% of your time to your kids or your job or something inbetween, desperately trying not to miss a beat at both jobs.

 

Yes. This would seem to sum it up.

[audrey_1]

I think it is important for a woman to be able to provide for herself and her children in case a marraige fails. If my Husband were to leave me tonight (which I know he wont) but if he were to leave, I would be perfectly fine financially. That is important to me. My Mothers generation never had that choice and put up wth a lot of abuse becasue they were entirely dependant on their Husbands.

 

Yes. My mother was completely dependent on my father for many years, and he ran all over her because she was a quiet, sensitive, mouse. And I love her for it. She is a beautiful, sensitive soul, and I wouldn't trade her for anything.

 

--BUT--

 

When my parent's divorced, after my father found out she had an affair, due to the fact she was all but emotionally shunned, my father made her life hell, and she was in a bind it took her sweat, tears and years to get out of.

 

There is no way I will allow that to be me. So compromise MUST be had where I can maintain some sense of independence i.e. financial power of my own making.

[Rooster_DAR]

Well I like career minded women as well, but unfortunately my EX also had the open door policy when it came to our relationship and wound up being a cheater and a liar.

 

What's really strange is that it seems that people with higher education and career paths have a higher propensity of being self centered, and are not reliable in a long term relationship. (Remember I said it seems)

 

I work with a group of doctors, and they all seem to have mistresses or they cheat on their girlfriends. I just don't understand it.

 

I hear Latina or South American women are by far the best long term investments (and better lovers), they seem to treat a man like a man and are a bit more traditional, but that is just speculation at this point.

 

Cheers!

[audrey_1]

What's really strange is that it seems that people with higher education and career paths have a higher propensity of being self centered, and are not reliable in a long term relationship. (Remember I said it seems)

 

Interesting point. Perhaps spending so much time in our brains makes it hard to relay this to RL and "feel" things. I'm aware of the disconnect and am trying very hard to work on it, now that there's someone that has made me feel very deeply, and I realize that it is some of MY idiosyncrasies that has caused digression rather than progress.

 

I'm not sure whether my self-work will result in a relationship with him, but I want to make sure I access this part of myself and reveal it to him so I will know for sure that I'm not in his heart.

 

And he never finished college, which is a deviation from my dating norm. My ex-fiancee was a very successful director of HR for a prestigious company, but we had other incompatibilities.

 

With my recent situation, I have to get over myself, and so does he.

[lonelyandfrustrated]

 

I hear Latina or South American women are by far the best long term investments (and better lovers), they seem to treat a man like a man and are a bit more traditional, but that is just speculation at this point.

 

Cheers!

 

Wow. Can you buy them?

 

I haven't met a Latino woman yet who didn't wear the pants in her family. As far as my experience, there are no mousy Latino women. Or mousy Latino girls.

 

I don't know about SA's.

[lonelyandfrustrated]

I should add: I'm a white gal. Like, Irish white. Pasty.

[fral945]

What's really strange is that it seems that people with higher education and career paths have a higher propensity of being self centered, and are not reliable in a long term relationship. (Remember I said it seems)

 

Interesting observation, I've noticed a pattern there as well. I don't know if it's true or not, but I remember reading a study somewhere recently that said professional women are more likely to get divorced, more likely to cheat, less likely to have children, and, if they do have kids, they are more likely to be unhappy about it. I believe the study defined a professional woman as having a university-level (or higher) education, works more than 35 hours a week outside the home and makes more than $30,000 a year.

 

I remember the study also noted that higher educated people (both men and women) and those who make more money are more likely to have extra-marital sex. Seems that most people are as loyal as their options and since better educated and richer people have more options, they take advantage of them.

[Star Gazer]

I'm not really sure what the alternative is in the beginning. If you're a single woman, say, in her 30s, you have to be somewhat focused on career, as you're responsible for your own survival. I don't think having a desire to succeed or to be good at what you do is a bad thing. Why should I hide the fact I worked two jobs my senior year of college to make ends meet? Have earned accolades by senior executives in past positions? All due to my hard work and dedication?

 

I do have a drive to be professionally accomplished, but I don't think that makes me less feminine. And I think that hiding this, or giving it up to make a man feel more secure is unwise. This same man who is threatened by the successful woman, is the one who will see her whittle away her self-worth, cheat on her with a younger woman, and then walk away.

 

I say women should keep their values and careers. I'm not saying I would put them before my children or a spouse that treats me well, and that I reciprocate this to. Just that allowing men to assume full responsibility for a family given all we've seen posted on these boards, I believe, would be too much a risk for me to take.

 

I agree with all of that, particularly the bolded statement.

 

But IMO, there is no way a woman can be an exemplary employee AND Mom of the year at the same time.

 

Says the woman who's voting for Palin. You either want a poor mother, or a poor executive in the VP's seat. Hmm.

[Rooster_DAR]

Interesting observation, I've noticed a pattern there as well. I don't know if it's true or not, but I remember reading a study somewhere recently that said professional women are more likely to get divorced, more likely to cheat, less likely to have children, and, if they do have kids, they are more likely to be unhappy about it. I believe the study defined a professional woman as having a university-level (or higher) education, works more than 35 hours a week outside the home and makes more than $30,000 a year.

 

I remember the study also noted that higher educated people (both men and women) and those who make more money are more likely to have extra-marital sex. Seems that most people are as loyal as their options and since better educated and richer people have more options, they take advantage of them.

 

That is the exact observation I have drawn.

 

I prefer somewhere in between, somebody that at least has an honest job that's not all in a wad about being wealthy or rich. A good steady income and a good sense of integrity are the most admiring traits for me. I want someone who is down to earth, and if they were suddenly poor tomorrow, they would not let that impede their determination and could handle it.

[lonelyandfrustrated]

Says the woman who's voting for Palin. You either want a poor mother, or a poor executive in the VP's seat. Hmm.

 

Sorry, but nobody can vote for Palin.

 

It's McCain or Obama.

 

/political thread derail

[jerbear]

I like career minded women.

 

I like women in skirts, pant suits, heels, and it reduces my stress that we/I/her/me will have to be home at a certain time. I personally prefer women who can take care of themselves and be independent of me.

[norajane]

I wonder if there is enough clarity in the statement "I'm independent and don't need a man"?

 

When women say that, they mean they are capable of supporting themselves financially and living on their own, and they don't need a man in order to do that.

 

The implication that may be missed, though, is that women WANT a special man in their lives. Why is it so terrible to want a man instead of needing him?

 

There is a difference between depending on someone you love and being dependent on them.

 

We depend on our lovers for affection, emotional, intellectual, and physical intimacy, love, companionship, friendship, fun, for so much! Just because we aren't dependent on men to support us financially, doesn't in any way mean we don't want men in our lives.

[Lizzie60]

Do any of you men find career women attractive or appealing? There was another thread on here about house husbands that made me think of this.

 

IMO, a women who is very career driven is unattractive. I don't have a problem with a woman who has a job or career, I just prefer a woman who puts more importance on having a good family over having a good career. I find most career women to be type A personalities (highly competitive, assertive, aggressive, etc.). These are generally traits in a woman that are turn-offs to me. Maybe I'm old-fashioned or set in my ways, IDK. Just wanted to get some different opinions.

 

I think that goes on both sides.. it's nice to have a great career but at the same time, the family life, love life have to come first.

 

I'm sure a lot of women can have it all.. it's not that hard..

[audrey_1]

I wonder if there is enough clarity in the statement "I'm independent and don't need a man"?

 

When women say that, they mean they are capable of supporting themselves financially and living on their own, and they don't need a man in order to do that.

 

The implication that may be missed, though, is that women WANT a special man in their lives. Why is it so terrible to want a man instead of needing him?

 

There is a difference between depending on someone you love and being dependent on them.

 

We depend on our lovers for affection, emotional, intellectual, and physical intimacy, love, companionship, friendship, fun, for so much! Just because we aren't dependent on men to support us financially, doesn't in any way mean we don't want men in our lives.

 

 

 

Maybe the *right* man will be clear?

:love::love:

[Trialbyfire]

I wonder if there is enough clarity in the statement "I'm independent and don't need a man"?

 

When women say that, they mean they are capable of supporting themselves financially and living on their own, and they don't need a man in order to do that.

 

The implication that may be missed, though, is that women WANT a special man in their lives. Why is it so terrible to want a man instead of needing him?

 

There is a difference between depending on someone you love and being dependent on them.

 

We depend on our lovers for affection, emotional, intellectual, and physical intimacy, love, companionship, friendship, fun, for so much! Just because we aren't dependent on men to support us financially, doesn't in any way mean we don't want men in our lives.

I completely agree with this. Not only will I never be dependent on a man, I won't be dependent on anyone, man or woman.

 

I want a balanced relationship, not one need. I want a relationship with a mutual desire to be with each other. I sincerely enjoy spoiling a loved one but also expect that I will be spoiled back, at least with and by a fellow adult.

 

As for children, they'll have every benefit possible, through love, strong foundations and quality, quality time. Less time spent doing domestic duties due to hired help, more time spent on loved ones. I've seen mothers who nag, nag, nag, consistently spewing negativity or ignoring their children while sitting in the same room with them, spending no real quality time with their children regardless of being a SAHM. No thanks.

[Untouchable_Fire]

I agree with all of that, particularly the bolded statement.

 

I like intelligent, motivated women, but "career women" are the ones who put that part of thier life first.

 

The bulk of females that fit into this category are very interested in, Power, Looking Good to Others, and Social Status.

 

Says the woman who's voting for Palin. You either want a poor mother, or a poor executive in the VP's seat. Hmm.

 

Life is different when you have a team of nannies!

[Untouchable_Fire]

There is a difference between depending on someone you love and being dependent on them.

 

We depend on our lovers for affection, emotional, intellectual, and physical intimacy, love, companionship, friendship, fun, for so much! Just because we aren't dependent on men to support us financially, doesn't in any way mean we don't want men in our lives.[/quote]

 

Yes, but in what capacity?

 

Example. Professing fiscal indepedance, then expecting me to pay 100% for the date.

 

If a woman doesn't need me to pay... then why should I have to?

[norajane]

There is a difference between depending on someone you love and being dependent on them.

 

We depend on our lovers for affection, emotional, intellectual, and physical intimacy, love, companionship, friendship, fun, for so much! Just because we aren't dependent on men to support us financially, doesn't in any way mean we don't want men in our lives.

 

Yes, but in what capacity?

 

I listed in what capacity - affection, emotional, intellectual, and physical intimacy, love, companionship, friendship, fun, every other capacity.

 

Example. Professing fiscal indepedance, then expecting me to pay 100% for the date.

 

If a woman doesn't need me to pay... then why should I have to?

 

We had a 50,000 page thread about that last week. My answer is they don't have to. It's a courtesy and a treat. But if a man asks to take a woman out on a date, he is asking to take her out, which implies paying. Just like if you said you wanted to take a friend out for their birthday...taking someone out means paying. Meeting up is different - that's not taking someone out on a date.

 

You didn't answer my question: what is so terrible about wanting a man instead of needing him?

[Stockalone]

I wonder if there is enough clarity in the statement "I'm independent and don't need a man"?

 

When women say that, they mean they are capable of supporting themselves financially and living on their own, and they don't need a man in order to do that.

 

Then why not say that? Why do you have to say you don't need a man when

you mean to say that you are financially stable and capable of paying your own bills?

 

 

 

The implication that may be missed, though, is that women WANT a special man in their lives. Why is it so terrible to want a man instead of needing him?

 

When you say that you are independent and don't need a man, that makes me think that I am not needed as a man. Why is it that when you don't need money, you say you don't need a man?

 

 

There is a difference between depending on someone you love and being dependent on them.

 

Does my life fall apart when I am not in a relationship with a woman? No, it doesn't.

 

Nevertheless, being single is not the same as being in a relationship. Sure, being single has it's advantages, but there are things that are missing in my life when I am single and those things, I cannot provide on my own.

 

If I want a relationship, I need a woman. If I want a family, I need a woman. There is no way around that.

 

 

We depend on our lovers for affection, emotional, intellectual, and physical intimacy, love, companionship, friendship, fun, for so much! Just because we aren't dependent on men to support us financially, doesn't in any way mean we don't want men in our lives.

 

I do not need a woman that needs me because of my income. But I want to be needed as a man. Would it kill you to say that you need a man for all those things you mentioned?

[Woggle]

A woman with a successful career is great but a careerist woman is not. There is a huge difference.

 

I don't think that women should depend on men but it raises red flags when a woman makes it a point to say how much she doesn't need us. What issues does she have with the male gender to make her want to declare to the world how useless we are in her life?

[fral945]

Not only will I never be dependent on a man, I won't be dependent on anyone, man or woman.

 

Wow, Trial, I know you are smart, but you don’t really believe that, do you? You take the idea of independence to the extreme. Do you grow your own food, make your own clothes, maintain the roads you travel, etc? When you have children, you said you will use hired help. Isn’t that another form of dependency? If you are truly independent, you don't need any help from others to do those things.

 

You know and I know you are dependent on other human beings to do those things for you. I could go on and on but hopefully you will see my point.

 

I want a balanced relationship, not one need. I want a relationship with a mutual desire to be with each other. No thanks.

 

So a balanced relationship involves no dependency? That doesn’t make any sense to me. I would expect a woman to be somewhat dependent on me in a relationship for sex, emotional intimacy, affection (to name a few). I am dependent on a woman in a relationship for those things and more.

[Trialbyfire]

fral, you've not only misquoted parts of what I said, you've also not understood that I was agreeing with norajane. Go back and reread what she wrote. I couldn't agree more with what she's posted.

 

No one will ever have a hold on me within a relationship beyond an emotional commitment. The reverse should hold true. Two people should be together because they want to be, not because they provide each other with services rendered, out of necessity.

 

Having said all that, once you make a commitment like marriage, you'd better be damn sure you can keep it.

[dannydrifter]

Do any of you men find career women attractive or appealing? There was another thread on here about house husbands that made me think of this.

 

IMO, a women who is very career driven is unattractive. I don't have a problem with a woman who has a job or career, I just prefer a woman who puts more importance on having a good family over having a good career. I find most career women to be type A personalities (highly competitive, assertive, aggressive, etc.). These are generally traits in a woman that are turn-offs to me. Maybe I'm old-fashioned or set in my ways, IDK. Just wanted to get some different opinions.

 

Good topic, and I agree with you completely. Especially what you said about them being too competitive. While I respect any woman who is career oriented, I don't particularly find them attractive at all nor do I extend them more respect than I would a lesser career oriented woman. In my experiences, career oriented women are much more of a challenge to develop a relationship with. Then when you are in a relationship, wife or otherwise, you will always have to deal with their work infatuations and activities. This includes attending after work functions, socializing with co-workers after hours, etc. Then you have their "professional" male co-workers, and it always seems there is at least 1 guy in ever workplace who knows your wife is married but he still choose to pursue her. Actually the more I think about "career women" the more I am turned off.